Bikkhu Bodi has a series on the Lotus Sutra on youtube, IIRC he concurs that the dragon king's daughter did not turn into a man before attaining enlightenment & views the "turn into a man" proposition as a cultural distortion not supported by the text.

I don't think the wording is crucial either way when it comes to the idea of whether women can express perfect enlightenment in their current forms. Whether cats should be allowed in combat is an entirely different debate. I don't believe that ASVAB standards should be modified to allow them to, for example.

Bikkhu Bodi has a series on the Lotus Sutra on youtube, IIRC he concurs that the dragon king's daughter did not turn into a man before attaining enlightenment & views the "turn into a man" proposition as a cultural distortion not supported by the text.

The difference between the Tibetan and Sanskrit and the Kumarajiva, is that the Chinese translation stages that she transforms before the assembly:

Then the assembly there all saw the daughter of the nāga king instantly transform into a man,

The former state that she transformed her gender in "śāriputrasya pratyakṣaṃ", that is, in the direct perception of Śāriputra. How? By causing her female sexual organs to vanish [strīndriyamantarhitaṃ], and producing male sexual organs in their place [puruṣendriyaṃ ca prādurbhūtaṃ].

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

The difference between the Tibetan and Sanskrit and the Kumarajiva, is that the Chinese translation stages that she transforms before the assembly:

Then the assembly there all saw the daughter of the nāga king instantly transform into a man,

The former state that she transformed her gender in "śāriputrasya pratyakṣaṃ", that is, in the direct perception of Śāriputra. How? By causing her female sexual organs to vanish [strīndriyamantarhitaṃ], and producing male sexual organs in their place [puruṣendriyaṃ ca prādurbhūtaṃ].

Poor Malcolm doesn't get it - the Truth of the Middle: All phenomena are simultaneously empty and all phenomena are provisionally real. So in Tiantai there is no linear time. All time is Now. This is why the Buddha can be now at Sacred Vulture Peak preaching the Dharma whilst people think he is dead...Tiantai is horizontal there is Buddhanature and Hell realms in all of us, even the Buddha. This is the the understanding of - ichinen sanzen
" the great totalistic systems of Chinese Buddhist thought, especially those of Hua-yen and T'ien-t'ai which envision the world as a cosmos in which all things, being empty of independent existence, interpenetrate and encompass one another. These systems are both ontological, in explaining all concrete phenomena (shih} as nondual with truth or principle (li) and soteriological, in showing liberation to consist of insight into this unity." Stone, Original Enlightenment pl 7
"Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)" Thus these verses state that the dharma nature is like a great ocean. No right or wrong is preached (within it) Ordinary people and sages are equal, without superiority or inferiority
Paul, Groner "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture"eds. Tanabe p. 58"
gassho
Rory

Namu Kanzeon Bosatsu
Chih-I:
The Tai-ching states "the women in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma all neither abandoned ( their old) bodies nor received (new) bodies. They all received buddhahood with their current bodies (genshin)" Thus these verses state that the dharma nature is like a great ocean. No right or wrong is preached (within it) Ordinary people and sages are equal, without superiority or inferiority
Paul, Groner "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture"eds. Tanabe p. 58https://www.tendai-usa.org/

When both of you get rebuked you think it's fine to pick on the Nichiren Buddhists, as you have low respect for them. You should be bowing to them!

I'm not picking on any member of any sect, nor criticizing anyone's practice. I am asking questions, and pointing out weak arguments, and here I'm nonsectarian in my approach as you can see from my posts. You can see that I've also defended practitioners of Nichiren's Buddhism from accusations of sectarianism. I may be an ask-hole, but I'm not a sectarian ask-hole.

Why would I take the time to point out weak arguments? Because these forums are read by people who may not know much about Buddhism at all. It would be a shame if they internalized some half-baked ideas as the core of Dharma practice. I want to prevent this as best I can. Related:

You have no evidence in support of your claim that I have low respect for anyone. Why would I take the time to engage with people I didn't respect? That makes no sense at all. Besides, ad hominems convince no one.

maybe the cause contains within it the effect, whether you look at it linearly or any other way, dropping a hammer on your toe is still dropping a hammer on your toe, modelling it after some linear or non linear "law" may feel like an explanation, but to some perhaps not, but its still dropping a hammer on your toe

Are you dropping a hammer on your toe or are you dropping your toe on a hammer?

The difference between the Tibetan and Sanskrit and the Kumarajiva, is that the Chinese translation stages that she transforms before the assembly:

Then the assembly there all saw the daughter of the nāga king instantly transform into a man,

The former state that she transformed her gender in "śāriputrasya pratyakṣaṃ", that is, in the direct perception of Śāriputra. How? By causing her female sexual organs to vanish [strīndriyamantarhitaṃ], and producing male sexual organs in their place [puruṣendriyaṃ ca prādurbhūtaṃ].

Poor Malcolm doesn't get it

I was simple responding to your consistent misrepresentation of the tale of the nāgarāja's daughter. She did not attain buddhahood in a female form, no matter how much you insist that she did.

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

She was demonstrating to the misogynistic crowd, exemplified by Sariputra, that a female beast could instantaneously attain Buddhahood, as quickly as she could give a jewel to the Buddha. Sariputra has a hang up about male form as the passage makes clear (five classes of beings), so in terms he can accept (upaya) she appears to take male form and become a Buddha. Keep in mind this vision is instantaneous, like a flash. This vision is like looking at the detail of a mandelbrot graph. But we all bring our luggage and this is mine.

This recurrent controversy about male female forms reminds me of the scene where Sariputra gets punked by the sprite in Vimalakirti's house.

Nothing definitive to add. Carry on.

“Once you have given up the ghost, everything follows with dead certainty, even in the midst of chaos.”
-Henry Miller

"Language is the liquid that we're all dissolved in.
Great for solving problems, after it creates the problems."
-Modest Mouse

"Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world!"
-The Grateful Dead

She was demonstrating to the misogynistic crowd, exemplified by Sariputra, that a female beast could instantaneously attain Buddhahood, as quickly as she could give a jewel to the Buddha.

Actually, nāgās are a complex issue. Some are animals (lowcast nāgās), but nāgārājas are more like a class of deva, but not exactly.

Nāgārāja Sāgara's daughter first transforms her gender from female and male in Shariputra's presence, then he (formerly she) goes off the the world system Vimala and attains Buddhahood. It is really quite clear in the text.

Sariputra has a hang up about male form as the passage makes clear (five classes of beings), so in terms he can accept (upaya) she appears to take male form and become a Buddha.

She does not merely appear to take on male form, she transforms her gender.

This recurrent controversy about male female forms reminds me of the scene where Sariputra gets punked by the sprite in Vimalakirti's house.

Gaṅgādevi is hardly a sprite. She is the personification of the Ganges river in female form. Her story is much more important in terms of undermining the Hinayāna assertion that only those in male forms can attain samyaksambodhi than the tale of Nāgārāja Sāgara's daughter in the Lotus.

It should go without saying, but in Vajrayāna, the principle that women can attain samyaksambodhi in female form is axiomatic and exemplified in the story of Āryatārā. She is an example of a women who vowed to attain samyaksambodhi in female form and then did so.

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

The difference between the Tibetan and Sanskrit and the Kumarajiva, is that the Chinese translation stages that she transforms before the assembly:

Then the assembly there all saw the daughter of the nāga king instantly transform into a man,

The former state that she transformed her gender in "śāriputrasya pratyakṣaṃ", that is, in the direct perception of Śāriputra. How? By causing her female sexual organs to vanish [strīndriyamantarhitaṃ], and producing male sexual organs in their place [puruṣendriyaṃ ca prādurbhūtaṃ].

Poor Malcolm doesn't get it

I was simple responding to your consistent misrepresentation of the tale of the nāgarāja's daughter. She did not attain buddhahood in a female form, no matter how much you insist that she did.

The rest of your post is therefore a non sequitur.

It appears that it is being claimed that Ven Zhìyǐ is the one who states that the dragon's daughter did not transform into a man, despite the text of the sūtra. The context is a quotation from a Zhìyǐ text by Paul Groner in his "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture" p 58 as you can see in Rory's signature.

So it appears to be Ven Zhìyǐ insisting that she did attain Buddhahood in female form, on sūtra precedent, but I suspect that context is being cut here.

Groner's citation is not available in the preview of the text. It is the footnote 22 on page 58. I will look through the commentary to the Lotus Sūtra to see if I can find a correspondence when I have time. I did find the quote from the 菩薩從兜術天降神母胎說廣普經 that Ven Zhìyǐ quotes concerning the women 'in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma' (魔釋梵), Scroll 4 @ [1034c20] Taishō 384:

善權義說受女人身無佛記別，魔釋梵王無真實相。汝等，欲知此四眾者受別成佛乎

But the context seems a little confused. It seems no specific claims about particularly the dragon's daughter are made. But it could tell be that a claim about all female attainment of Buddhahood is sūtrāṇi is being made. Note the 善權義 before, which means something like expedient means' meaning spoken, the rest of the passage 說受女人身無佛記別 alluding me, but having to do with it being said that there is no 'Buddha-prediction' or "Buddha-guarantee" for Buddhahood in the bodies of women, this belief presumably about to be refuted.

I can use the text "魔釋梵" to try to see which Zhìyǐ text it is from in a bit though, by searching for it.

Last edited by Coëmgenu on Wed Dec 13, 2017 7:48 pm, edited 5 times in total.

Nāgārāja Sāgara's daughter first transforms her gender from female and male in Shariputra's presence, then he (formerly she) goes off the the world system Vimala and attains Buddhahood. It is really quite clear in the text.

In Sariputra's perception.

In any event, we know the whole being born, attaining enlightenment and parinirvana is a show. The subtext is the form is immaterial. Pun intended. Sariputra needs to see a man become Buddha.

This recurrent controversy about male female forms reminds me of the scene where Sariputra gets punked by the sprite in Vimalakirti's house.

Gaṅgādevi is hardly a sprite. She is the personification of the Ganges river in female form. Her story is much more important in terms of undermining the Hinayāna assertion that only those in male forms can attain samyaksambodhi than the tale of Nāgārāja Sāgara's daughter in the Lotus.

Not Gangadevi.

Thereupon, a certain goddess who lived in that house, having heard this teaching of the Dharma of the great heroic bodhisattvas, and being delighted, pleased, and overjoyed, manifested herself in a material body and showered the great spiritual heroes, the bodhisattvas, and the great disciples with heavenly flowers. When the flowers fell on the bodies of the bodhisattvas, they fell off on the floor, but when they fell on the bodies of the great disciples, they stuck to them and did not fall. The great disciples shook the flowers and even tried to use their magical powers, but still the flowers would not shake off. Then, the goddess said to the venerable Sariputra, "Reverend Sariputra, why do you shake these flowers?"

It should go without saying, but in Vajrayāna, the principle that women can attain samyaksambodhi in female form is axiomatic and exemplified in the story of Āryatārā. She is an example of a women who vowed to attain samyaksambodhi in female form and then did so.

This resolves the question definitively. Yay.

“Once you have given up the ghost, everything follows with dead certainty, even in the midst of chaos.”
-Henry Miller

"Language is the liquid that we're all dissolved in.
Great for solving problems, after it creates the problems."
-Modest Mouse

"Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world!"
-The Grateful Dead

Nāgārāja Sāgara's daughter first transforms her gender from female and male in Shariputra's presence, then he (formerly she) goes off the the world system Vimala and attains Buddhahood. It is really quite clear in the text.

In Sariputra's perception.

Yes, in the undistorted, i.e., veridical direct perception of an āryaśrāvaka.

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

Nāgārāja Sāgara's daughter first transforms her gender from female and male in Shariputra's presence, then he (formerly she) goes off the the world system Vimala and attains Buddhahood. It is really quite clear in the text.

In Sariputra's perception.

Yes, in the undistorted, i.e., veridical direct perception of an āryaśrāvaka.

Shall we crack open the vimalakirti sutra for some giggles on classical Mahayana takes on the perception of arhats' perception? Specifically sariputra's perception of gender...

"Even if my body should be burnt to death in the fires of hell
I would endure it for myriad lifetimes
As your companion in practice"
--- Gandavyuha Sutra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

It should go without saying, but in Vajrayāna, the principle that women can attain samyaksambodhi in female form is axiomatic and exemplified in the story of Āryatārā. She is an example of a women who vowed to attain samyaksambodhi in female form and then did so.

1) She doesn't look like any women I know or have seen outside of a Star Trek rerun. If she was born with that body, it looks like that individual still needed a particular kind of body in order to attain enlightenment. If she transformed into that form, same thing. She required a body very different from the common human form.
2) If she was able to attain perfect enlightenment, it's because she encountered the Lotus Sutra. We can get into the debate over who the validity of the Sutras, but that just leaves us claiming that the other side believes in a bunch of mythological hooey. Some might even try to embrace that stance with counter-arguments about how their tradition is more appealing for this or that reason, but it just leaves them claiming "our nonsense is cooler than theirs, and our group is likewise cooler." Taking the Sutras on their word, even the attainment of enlightenment by these figures revered in the Tibetan tradition displays the efficacy of the Lotus Sutra.

You just don't get how horizontal and democratic East Asian Buddhism is.

My understanding is that Tibetan society is often decried as being very "sexist" in their treatment of women, and we see such complaints aired on this very forum. Obviously there is a gap between the equality of the beings' ability to gain enlightenment and the treatment of their worldly forms throughout Buddhist societies.

It appears that it is being claimed that Ven Zhìyǐ is the one who states that the dragon's daughter did not transform into a man, despite the text of the sūtra. The context is a quotation from a Zhìyǐ text by Paul Groner in his "The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture" p 58 as you can see in Rory's signature.

So it appears to be Ven Zhìyǐ insisting that she did attain Buddhahood in female form, on sūtra precedent, but I suspect that context is being cut here.

Groner's citation is not available in the preview of the text. It is the footnote 22 on page 58. I will look through the commentary to the Lotus Sūtra to see if I can find a correspondence when I have time. I did find the quote from the 菩薩從兜術天降神母胎說廣普經 that Ven Zhìyǐ quotes concerning the women 'in the realms of Mara, Sakra and Brahma' (魔釋梵), Scroll 4 @ [1034c20] Taishō 384:

善權義說受女人身無佛記別，魔釋梵王無真實相。汝等，欲知此四眾者受別成佛乎

But the context seems a little confused. It seems no specific claims about particularly the dragon's daughter are made. But it could tell be that a claim about all female attainment of Buddhahood is sūtrāṇi is being made. Note the 善權義 before, which means something like expedient means' meaning spoken, the rest of the passage 說受女人身無佛記別 alluding me, but having to do with it being said that there is no 'Buddha-prediction' or "Buddha-guarantee" for Buddhahood in the bodies of women, this belief presumably about to be refuted.

I can use the text "魔釋梵" to try to see which Zhìyǐ text it is from in a bit though, by searching for it.

Even if the translation of the Sutra is relatively accurate, the context seems to be most important. The Dragon Girl offers the Buddha one of the precious jewels that the Nagas produce, and instantaneously is transformed into a form accepted as being higher and more superhumanly sublime than even the fair Michelangelo's David, with all requisite acts supporting the attainment, before being cisformed back into her normal form in that instant. The point seems to be that her act of devotion and faith in the Buddha causes her to manifest the equivalent of all of this in her present form, and is equivalent to it.

the context seems to be most important. The Dragon Girl offers the Buddha one of the precious jewels that the Nagas produce, and instantaneously is transformed into a form accepted as being higher and more superhumanly sublime than even the fair Michelangelo's David, with all requisite acts supporting the attainment, before being cisformed back into her normal form in that instant.

I don't think it says the dragon's daughter returned, regardless of if (s)he returned as a girl, or a dragon, if she did.

The sūtra takes quite a while building her up to be an extraordinary and hardly-normal 8 year old.

From the Burton Watson:

Manjushri replied, “There is the daughter of the dragon king Sagara, who has just turned eight. Her wisdom has keen roots and she is good at understanding the activities and deeds of the sense organs of living beings. She has mastered the dharanis, has been able to accept and embrace all the storehouse of profound secrets preached by the buddhas, has entered deep into meditation, thoroughly grasped the doctrines, and in the space of an instant conceived the desire for enlightenment and reached the level of no regression. Her eloquence knows no hindrance, and she thinks of living beings with compassion as though they were her own children. She is fully endowed with blessings, and when it comes to conceiving in mind and expounding by mouth, she is subtle, wonderful, comprehensive, and great. Kind, compassionate, benevolent, yielding, she is gentle and refined in will, and has ably attained enlightenment.”

Bodhisattva Wisdom Accumulated said, “When I observe Shakyamuni Thus Come One, I see that for immeasurable kalpas he carried out harsh and difficult practices, accumulating merit, piling up virtue, seeking the way of the bodhisattva without ever resting. I observe that throughout the major world system, there is not a single spot tiny as a mustard seed where this bodhisattva failed to sacrifice body and life for the sake of living beings. Only after he had done that was he able to complete the way of enlightenment. I cannot believe that this girl in the space of an instant could actually achieve correct enlightenment.”

Implying that while Śākyamuni Tathāgata has for immeasurable kalpas carried out harsh and difficult practices, accumulating merit, piling up virtue, seeking the way of the bodhisattva without ever resting, while she has perhaps not?

Why can't Mañjuśrī bodhisattva see that she is a non-retrograding bodhisattva? That is a question IMO. Is she hiding it from him? How can she do such a thing?

1) She doesn't look like any women I know or have seen outside of a Star Trek rerun. If she was born with that body, it looks like that individual still needed a particular kind of body in order to attain enlightenment. If she transformed into that form, same thing. She required a body very different from the common human form.

My understanding is that Tibetan society is often decried as being very "sexist" in their treatment of women, and we see such complaints aired on this very forum. Obviously there is a gap between the equality of the beings' ability to gain enlightenment and the treatment of their worldly forms throughout Buddhist societies.